|
On July 27 2015 03:38 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 03:35 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 03:31 Rels wrote: So what you said: "Rels said his post didn't require thought". "Rels said his post required thought". Is not what happened.
The situation is: "Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not) "Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects". I'm going to label this as "Rels having fun with semantics." And I am going to label it as "the 3rd time Rels has been forced to retcon a story, after there being 5 times he has contradicted himself." LOL Actually that makes me relieved, I'm now sure you're mafia 'cause no way townie behaves like that. (= *eyeroll* Would love to see you try and explain how and why that isn't EXACTLY how a townie behaves. If you paid me 10 bucks to come up with a different reasonable reaction from a Town player, I'm not sure there IS one.
|
On July 27 2015 03:47 n00bKing wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 03:37 MoosyDoosy wrote: n00bKing, I'm reading your filter next but I'm gonna say that I don't feel good about you getting tunneled this hard on Rels. Something that I said might happen and warned you about before too. :/ I don't think "tunneled" means what you think it does. Tough to accuse me of "tunnel vision" when I am continuously giving thoughts on other players besides Rels, and continuously engaging in discussions that have nothing to do with Rels. If there is any player that you aren't sure what I think of them, that's about to be corrected. Then I'm waiting for your epitaph.
|
On July 27 2015 03:40 raynpelikoneet wrote: If you always do this mafia can lie for whatever reason and you will never find mafia. Townies should never lie, unless they can clearly point out why it's beneficial for the town (see for example fake claims). Okay...and do you feel that Rels has adequately explained how his lie was beneficial for the Town? Because I do not.
|
On July 27 2015 03:49 n00bKing wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 03:38 Rels wrote:On July 27 2015 03:35 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 03:31 Rels wrote: So what you said: "Rels said his post didn't require thought". "Rels said his post required thought". Is not what happened.
The situation is: "Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not) "Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects". I'm going to label this as "Rels having fun with semantics." And I am going to label it as "the 3rd time Rels has been forced to retcon a story, after there being 5 times he has contradicted himself." LOL Actually that makes me relieved, I'm now sure you're mafia 'cause no way townie behaves like that. (= *eyeroll* Would love to see you try and explain how and why that isn't EXACTLY how a townie behaves. If you paid me 10 bucks to come up with a different reasonable reaction from a Town player, I'm not sure there IS one. Don't have to look very far. Lying about me lying. Ad hominem attacks on me.
|
On July 27 2015 03:50 MoosyDoosy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 03:47 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 03:37 MoosyDoosy wrote: n00bKing, I'm reading your filter next but I'm gonna say that I don't feel good about you getting tunneled this hard on Rels. Something that I said might happen and warned you about before too. :/ I don't think "tunneled" means what you think it does. Tough to accuse me of "tunnel vision" when I am continuously giving thoughts on other players besides Rels, and continuously engaging in discussions that have nothing to do with Rels. If there is any player that you aren't sure what I think of them, that's about to be corrected. Then I'm waiting for your epitaph. Naw, I'll have my reads out sooner than that. I said I would have them posted so that if blue roles were townreading me, they could know where I stood, as far as who would be good targets for what. And I again cannot guarantee my presence at the deadline, so while I intend to post an epitaph, anything I REALLY want to make sure I get said, needs to be earlier.
|
On July 27 2015 03:52 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 03:49 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 03:38 Rels wrote:On July 27 2015 03:35 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 03:31 Rels wrote: So what you said: "Rels said his post didn't require thought". "Rels said his post required thought". Is not what happened.
The situation is: "Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not) "Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects". I'm going to label this as "Rels having fun with semantics." And I am going to label it as "the 3rd time Rels has been forced to retcon a story, after there being 5 times he has contradicted himself." LOL Actually that makes me relieved, I'm now sure you're mafia 'cause no way townie behaves like that. (= *eyeroll* Would love to see you try and explain how and why that isn't EXACTLY how a townie behaves. If you paid me 10 bucks to come up with a different reasonable reaction from a Town player, I'm not sure there IS one. Don't have to look very far. Lying about me lying. Ad hominem attacks on me. Accusing me of ad hominem is absurd. I attack your posts. Anything I say about your character can be freely discarded without it weakening my arguments against you one iota. And I am not lying about you lying. You're caught in a lie. And caught badly enough that you had to resort to a third retcon job.
|
BTW can't believe you AGAIN attacked me with ad hom when you just had a big paragraph defending from my post attacking you for exactly that.
|
On July 27 2015 03:35 n00bKing wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 03:31 Rels wrote: So what you said: "Rels said his post didn't require thought". "Rels said his post required thought". Is not what happened.
The situation is: "Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not) "Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects". I'm going to label this as "Rels having fun with semantics." And I am going to label it as "the 3rd time Rels has been forced to retcon a story, after there being 5 times he has contradicted himself." You are both arguing about semantics so feel free to point out how what Rels says here is clearly another lie, because i don't really understand it.
|
On July 27 2015 03:35 n00bKing wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 03:31 Rels wrote: So what you said: "Rels said his post didn't require thought". "Rels said his post required thought". Is not what happened.
The situation is: "Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not) "Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects". I'm going to label this as "Rels having fun with semantics." And I am going to label it as "the 3rd time Rels has been forced to retcon a story, after there being 5 times he has contradicted himself."
?!!!
His story checks out. Your grandiose witch hunt on this small little detail doesn't matter jack shit in the long run because what you want to look for is mafia motivation and not get hung up in small details like this that totally derail town productivity. I can perfectly understand rels logic here and nothing in that argument is him contradicting himself.
Go look at the broader strokes of the game and try to discern mafia motivation from that, this topic of rels scum-read has been beaten to death and you're not going to convince me he's scum for it.
|
On July 27 2015 03:55 n00bKing wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 03:52 Rels wrote:On July 27 2015 03:49 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 03:38 Rels wrote:On July 27 2015 03:35 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 03:31 Rels wrote: So what you said: "Rels said his post didn't require thought". "Rels said his post required thought". Is not what happened.
The situation is: "Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not) "Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects". I'm going to label this as "Rels having fun with semantics." And I am going to label it as "the 3rd time Rels has been forced to retcon a story, after there being 5 times he has contradicted himself." LOL Actually that makes me relieved, I'm now sure you're mafia 'cause no way townie behaves like that. (= *eyeroll* Would love to see you try and explain how and why that isn't EXACTLY how a townie behaves. If you paid me 10 bucks to come up with a different reasonable reaction from a Town player, I'm not sure there IS one. Don't have to look very far. Lying about me lying. Ad hominem attacks on me. Accusing me of ad hominem is absurd. I attack your posts. Anything I say about your character can be freely discarded without it weakening my arguments against you one iota. And I am not lying about you lying. You're caught in a lie. And caught badly enough that you had to resort to a third retcon job. Alright I hate how you play. You accuse me with arguments; I answer it with arguments; then you go around saying I lie as if what I said was worthless.
So I want you to do the following.
Describe very synthetically (1 sentence if possible) how I lied, without all the fluff that you usually post around it. Tomorrow I'll take the time to make a post explaining how you're wrong.
|
On July 27 2015 04:00 ruXxar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 03:35 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 03:31 Rels wrote: So what you said: "Rels said his post didn't require thought". "Rels said his post required thought". Is not what happened.
The situation is: "Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not) "Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects". I'm going to label this as "Rels having fun with semantics." And I am going to label it as "the 3rd time Rels has been forced to retcon a story, after there being 5 times he has contradicted himself." ?!!! His story checks out. Your grandiose witch hunt on this small little detail doesn't matter jack shit in the long run because what you want to look for is mafia motivation and not get hung up in small details like this that totally derail town productivity. I can perfectly understand rels logic here and nothing in that argument is him contradicting himself. Go look at the broader strokes of the game and try to discern mafia motivation from that, this topic of rels scum-read has been beaten to death and you're not going to convince me he's scum for it.
Ruxxor makes a good post. Must be scum
|
On July 27 2015 04:01 Damdred wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 04:00 ruXxar wrote:On July 27 2015 03:35 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 03:31 Rels wrote: So what you said: "Rels said his post didn't require thought". "Rels said his post required thought". Is not what happened.
The situation is: "Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not) "Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects". I'm going to label this as "Rels having fun with semantics." And I am going to label it as "the 3rd time Rels has been forced to retcon a story, after there being 5 times he has contradicted himself." ?!!! His story checks out. Your grandiose witch hunt on this small little detail doesn't matter jack shit in the long run because what you want to look for is mafia motivation and not get hung up in small details like this that totally derail town productivity. I can perfectly understand rels logic here and nothing in that argument is him contradicting himself. Go look at the broader strokes of the game and try to discern mafia motivation from that, this topic of rels scum-read has been beaten to death and you're not going to convince me he's scum for it. Ruxxor makes a good post. Must be scum
|
On July 27 2015 04:01 Damdred wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 04:00 ruXxar wrote:On July 27 2015 03:35 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 03:31 Rels wrote: So what you said: "Rels said his post didn't require thought". "Rels said his post required thought". Is not what happened.
The situation is: "Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not) "Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects". I'm going to label this as "Rels having fun with semantics." And I am going to label it as "the 3rd time Rels has been forced to retcon a story, after there being 5 times he has contradicted himself." ?!!! His story checks out. Your grandiose witch hunt on this small little detail doesn't matter jack shit in the long run because what you want to look for is mafia motivation and not get hung up in small details like this that totally derail town productivity. I can perfectly understand rels logic here and nothing in that argument is him contradicting himself. Go look at the broader strokes of the game and try to discern mafia motivation from that, this topic of rels scum-read has been beaten to death and you're not going to convince me he's scum for it. Ruxxor makes a good post. Must be scum
|
Fuck me what have I done....
|
=D That made me laugh IRL.
Alright will check from time to time, but unless something big comes up, AFK until tomorrow.
|
Damdred what's your thought on n00bKing vs Rels?
|
^ Just a quick one-liner and I'll post my own thought on it.
|
i'll be honest i think Rels is town for this:
On July 24 2015 22:35 raynpelikoneet wrote: Barakos i would like you to elaborate onto your read on Barakos. Why is the post you have been called out for scummy?
On July 24 2015 22:38 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2015 22:35 raynpelikoneet wrote: Barakos i would like you to elaborate onto your read on Barakos. =D I don't care to elaborate further but he is totally town because he was the only one who gets this.
|
Also as a btw, my list changed a bit after actually reading through filters and reading some more thoughts.
I'll post it after Damdred gives his thought on n00bKing vs Rels.
|
On July 27 2015 04:05 ruXxar wrote: Fuck me what have I done.... At least you now know how to screw everyone over in your next game as Mafia. Post random shit that doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
|